Out Of Money, Out Of Time: State Must Be Streamlined

If ever the time was right to reorganize Connecticut state government from top to bottom, it is now.

The state is facing budget deficits of $3.5 billion a year at least through 2014. Long-term, unfunded state liabilities exceed $72 billion, about $20,000 for every man, woman and child in the state. That includes $19.3 billion in long-term debt, $20.9 billion in unfunded state employee and teacher pensions, $26.6 billion in state retiree health and life insurance and other obligations.

This situation is far worse than a mere one- or two-year budget problem for the new governor and General Assembly to overcome. It is a monumental issue that can no longer be patched over with one-time revenues and borrowing against the future.

This is a defining moment, a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity for decisive leadership to reform the administrative machinery of state government. It is the time to adopt a more efficient and economical organization to deliver services at lower cost.

Nothing less than a complete streamlining of the hundreds of state departments, agencies and commissions should be the order of the day, before any action on what taxes to increase. It will be a difficult task, but one that is long overdue.

Many departments involve layers of management, finance, human resources and other support services. These include commissioners, deputy commissioners, assistant commissioners and a variety of middle managers. Many of these are political appointees, paid $100,000 or more per year, plus benefits, office space and other expenses.

Setting a goal of eliminating at least half of all political patronage jobs would be a down payment toward deficit reduction. Reducing middle manager positions could be accomplished by attrition. Appointees from the previous administration are leaving, and posts can simply be left vacant or eliminated.

Merging the number of departments and agencies by at least one-third would be a significant step. Freezing executive branch salaries, as President Barack Obama has done at the federal level, would be another gesture to demonstrate the seriousness of the situation.

On the long list of state agencies, there are obvious overlaps. Many departments and agencies were established to serve the interests of a single group, but they could be combined and operate equally or more effectively.

The Department of Agriculture and the Department of Environmental Protection have offices that deal with preservation of farmland, forestry, fishing and aquaculture. Why not combine the offices, or even the two departments?

Officials have proposed consolidating various state economic development authorities and agencies, only to be rebuffed by the legislature. The move is overdue.

There may be educational as well as fiscal benefits to merging the Department of Education and the Department of Higher Education, which oversee local public schools, state colleges and universities. Another initiative would eliminate the central office of the Connecticut State University system, which supervises four state college presidents.

Some restructuring ideas require voter approval for constitutional amendments. One example would be to downgrade or eliminate the cabinet-level secretary of the state, who is often seen with a car and driver, traversing the state, giving out awards, urging people to register to vote and appearing on the chicken dinner circuit.

So, too, with the state comptroller, another high-level constitutional office, with many perquisites and few major duties.

The biggest stumbling block lies with the 187-member state legislature, which ultimately controls the power of the purse and has great difficulty saying no to any constituent group.

The legislative majority contributed to the state's massive fiscal problems by allowing spending to rise at unsustainable levels in boom times and failing to find major reductions when the economy turned sour. From the 2003-2004 budget year through 2007-2008, state spending grew by about 30 percent.

Whenever a consolidation proposal was raised, legislators' phones started ringing and nearly every restructuring idea was quickly buried. One notable exception was last year's consolidation of the state probate courts. So, it can be done.

To be sure, reorganizing government alone will not close the budget gap that amounts to nearly 20 percent of the $18 billion state operating budget. Nor can taxes alone be raised by 20 percent without causing disruption to an already shaky economic recovery.

One would hope there could be at least $2 billion in cost savings for any $1 billion in tax increases.

Some significant amount of state government restructuring is crucial. Households, businesses, nonprofits and other institutions have restructured. Why not government? Joseph Santangelo of Old Saybrook is a former state House Republican staffer.